All right, all right! Interim decision regarding qualified Object methods

[Mehrdad]

On Thursday, 12 July 2012 at 09:32:00 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> The issue that we're trying to solve here is making 
> opEquals,opCmp, toHash, and toString work both for const and 
> non-const objects. That's it. We're not talking about revamping 
> const. It doesn't need it.

Depends on what you mean by 'need' I guess? You can either get 
rid of the cause or the effect, and either way that will get rid 
of the effect.


> this particular situation where OO and const collide needs a 
> solution.
> ...
> That may mean that you can't use const in your code,

Right, I'm not. I'm not complaining about my code here.

My point is, there is _nothing_ about this problem that screams 
out "druntime" or "Phobos" to me.
It's a problem that can happen to _anyone_ using trying to use 
'const' with base classes in OOP.

So if you're saying you can't use const with OOP, then I'm saying 
one of those needs to be fixed, and I was suggesting the former 
as a candidate.

But if you're saying this problem is somehow 'special' in some 
way, then would you please mention how?